[Excerpts from the Political-Organisational Report adopted at
the Third Party Congress, Dec.1982.]

The present situation of India, which is giving rise to a
revolutionary crisis, is also marked by a parliamentary and constitutional
crisis. The Indian constitution and parliamentary democracy in India were by no
means the result of any bourgeois democratic revolution and so never had the
vitality of bourgeois democracy. However, to whatever extent the facade of
democracy might have been maintained in relatively peaceful periods, in times of
strain it was thrown overboard and utilised in the interests of the ruling
party. At present when the Indira autocratic clique has reduced these
institutions to a mockery and is even proceeding towards a presidential system,
bourgeois intellectuals and bourgeois opposition parties are making a great
hullabaloo. It appears that the entire orientation of democratic struggles of
the Indian people is to safeguard the sanctity of bourgeois constitution and
bourgeois parliament. Various brands of alternatives are being peddled, everyone
is claiming that he alone is capable of maintaining the sanctity of the
constitution and parliament. The CPI(M) revisionists have also come up with
their brand of national alternative based on the governments run by them and
have named it Left and Democratic Front. In the Vijaywada Congress held this
year, they declared, "The struggle for the building and realisation of Left and
Democratic Front starts in conditions in which neither the CPI(M), nor the
working class is accepted by others as the leading force. They are accepted as
important partners and equal partners only. With the growth of the unity of
these forces and the struggle for the realisation of the programme put forward,
the weight and influence of the working class will certainly increase but this
will be a far cry from the leadership of the working class which is achieved
under a quite different correlation of forces." This clearly reveals that the
CPI(M) has entirely discarded the programme of people's democracy led by the
working class which is a 'far cry' to it and in the name of the transitory stage
of 'Left and Democratic Front', what it advocates is safeguarding the 'purity'
and sanctity of the bourgeois constitution and parliamentary democracy. For this
purpose it proposes to form governments with opposition parties not as a leading
force, rather as an equal or, at least, important partner.

We, of course, will always oppose any attack by autocratic forces on any
democratic right of the people, even nominal or formal ones, but any transitory
phase towards people's democracy can be termed transitory only if it helps the
masses cast away illusions of parliamentary democracy. Even the participation of
communists in bourgeois parliaments is meant to break it from within and not to
safeguard and strengthen it. It is evident that the CPI(M)'s transitory phase is
transitory towards submerging itself in the ocean of parliamentary democracy and
is the renunciation of people's democracy. And this formulation, on which it is
at one with the CPI with only minor differences, brings about the unity of the
two parties' concepts of People's Democratic Revolution and National Democratic
Revolution via the Left and Democratic Front. On other matters of foreign
policy, the CPI(M) has already traveled back to the CPI's line and with LDF,
major differences on tactical line are also removed. That is why the two
parties, with the expulsion of Dange, were never so close as today.

Under these conditions, communist revolutionaries of India should resolutely
hold high the banner of people's democracy and devise the forms and methods of
advancing towards this goal. In the present situation, when many non-party
forces are coming up and a widespread urge and struggle for democracy is
developing even on the part of bourgeois intellectuals, it is the duty of the
Party of the proletariat to come forward with its banner of 'National
Alternative' in forms and slogans which are acceptable to, and capable of
uniting, the broadest sections of the democratic forces. Definitely such a forum
must be mainly extra-parliamentary, depend on people's struggles for its
expansion, consolidation and victory and must only include the social forces of
democratic revolution, i. e., the working class, peasant classes, intellectuals
and progressive sections of the bourgeoisie. This front will also make
adjustments with parties and mass organisations of the bourgeois opposition in
democratic struggles without, however, joining with them in a single programme-based
front. Such scope for adjustment may also be there with certain individuals in
these parties as well as with some of these parties on particular issues of
anti-imperialist struggles. Revolutionary Marxist-Leninist and other
revolutionary parties and organisations, democratic mass organisations and
patriotic-democratic individuals will be the component parts of this front. This
front must include the democratic-patriotic sections of Indian people living
abroad, must support their struggles against racial and other discriminations
and through them must also widely propagate abroad every anti-democratic act and
repression on the people of India.

The front must also learn to skillfully utilise the contradictions among the
ruling classes, to project itself as an alternative against all sorts of
bourgeois and revisionist combinations and within the front, the Party of the
proletariat must always be consistent in fighting liberal-bourgeois tendencies
to make the front a non-political one, a routine or parliamentary one, a front
of social reform, of unprincipled compromises with sections of ruling classes
etc. and provide it a clear direction towards militant mass struggles and the
ultimate goal of seizing political power.

Originally, we had the idea of building a front with forces other than
workers, peasants and petty bourgeoisie only after building at least a few areas
of red political power. For, areas of red political power are the concrete
manifestations of worker-peasant unity. However, in practice things turned out
differently. We have not been able to build up or maintain areas of red
political power, but for 15 years the Party of the proletariat has been
conducting battles to this end and now we find that two trends, two objective
facts leading to the same democratic goal have emerged. On the one hand, there
are the areas of resistance struggles of the peasantry -- more or less stable --
the areas where red terror is exercised over the class enemies, in certain
pockets of Bihar and perhaps Andhra; and many such areas were built up elsewhere
but either they perished or suffered setbacks and are in the process of
reorganisation. On the other hand, there is a trend of democratic movements of
vast sections of the Indian people, movements coordinating various sections of
the people and even of nationwide character. Take the case of the 19 January
strike, or even the recent Bihar Press Bill. Has it not become an all-India
issue? Not only journalists but all other sections of the people are raising
voices against this Bill. They are doing so because they feel that it is an
attack on freedom of expression. Today the press is censored, tomorrow nobody
will be allowed to speak. And hence this trend of democratic urge, of democratic
struggles. Now there are opposition parties, revisionists and selfish people who
will try to divert these movements. And therefore the proletariat must step in.
For 15 years, it has been with the peasants, organised and led them in
revolutionary struggles which were unprecedented in breadth and scale and today
it maintains areas of resistance struggle. And therefore these two trends must
be combined. There must come up an all-India people's front basing on the areas
of resistance struggle.

Why should this front base itself on the areas of resistance struggles?
Because such areas of resistance struggle are built up only on the basis of
radical agrarian programme and without a radical agrarian programme there can be
no proletarian leadership. Moreover, these areas of resistance struggle should
serve as a model for united front work. ...

Some people ask what these intermediate forces are. By intermediate forces we
mean those who are intermediate between us and the ruling classes. In different
forms and forums they are organised as petty-bourgeois leaders of the working
class, nationality leaders, civil libertarians, bourgeois intellectuals, even
some religious and oppressed caste leaders etc. It is quite natural that they
will vacillate; sometimes they may come to us, sometimes may even send telegrams
to Indira Gandhi. Now, how are we to be blamed for that? We have already said
that they are intermediates. They have non-party ideas. What is this 'non-party
idea'? This is an anti-socialist bourgeois idea as Lenin says. And communists
will fight this idea. Still non-party organisations are there and truly
speaking, the whole of the democratic revolution from appearance will bear a
non-party stamp -- a front stamp. But within it the struggle between proletarian
and bourgeois ideas, between parties inside and outside will go on and that will
determine the essence of the matter. The Party will maintain its independent
areas of struggle and also work within the front.

Now it is true that this front is based on resistance struggles and its
expansion and development will help develop armed struggle and base area
building. But how will this front proceed, in what form will it develop? What
are its laws of development? On this question, we are in the midst of
experiments. Initially, we have built up a front with certain sections of
communist revolutionaries and intermediate forces from many parts of India. This
is a great achievement for a small Party. In contrast to the CPI(M)'s tactics of
forming governments in states, this front should come up with its slogan of
people's government -- the slogan of a genuine democratic republic. The time
many come when this front may have to advance the slogan of a provisional
revolutionary government to convene a constituent assembly based on popular
representation. The question of provisional revolutionary government brings
forward the question of insurrection. Through organising insurrections from
above, the Party plans to combine class struggle from both below and above. In
this context comes the question of utilisation of parliamentary elections. The
election question at a certain time may be linked up with insurrection and then
you will be forcing elections on the government. In other times, when there are
no prospects of slogans for a constituent assembly and provisional revolutionary
government getting popular for a long time, you may think of utilising
elections, while in other prospects you should not.